The squatting position for the second stage of labor: effects on labor and on maternal and fetal well-being

Upright positions in childbirth and the prevention of perineal lacerations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether the adoption of upright positions by women during childbirth prevents perineal lacerations compared to the lithotomy position.

METHOD

A systematic review with meta-analysis. The searches were carried out in the databases: LILACS, Medline/PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Science Direct and Scopus. Searches in the gray literature were conducted on Google Scholar and OpenGrey databases. Reference lists of included articles were also considered. The Cochrane collaboration tool and ACROBAT-NRSI were used to analyze the methodological quality of the articles.

RESULTS

There were 26 studies listed and 8 were selected for the meta-analysis. The level of scientific evidence was classified by the GRADE System and considered high. There was no statistically significant difference between upright positions in relation to horizontal positions. Despite this finding, the upright positions showed reduced rates of severe perineal lacerations.

CONCLUSION

Adopting upright positions in normal delivery can be encouraged by professionals as it can prevent severe perineal lacerations; however, it is not possible to accurately affirm their effectiveness to the detriment of horizontal positions for an intact perineum outcome.

Position in the second stage of labour for women without epidural anaesthesia

BACKGROUND

For centuries, there has been controversy around whether being upright (sitting, birthing stools, chairs, squatting, kneeling) or lying down (lateral (Sim's) position, semi-recumbent, lithotomy position, Trendelenburg's position) have advantages for women giving birth to their babies. This is an update of a review previously published in 2012, 2004 and 1999.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the possible benefits and risks of the use of different birth positions during the second stage of labour without epidural anaesthesia, on maternal, fetal, neonatal and caregiver outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (30 November 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, quasi-randomised or cluster-randomised controlled trials of any upright position assumed by pregnant women during the second stage of labour compared with supine or lithotomy positions. Secondary comparisons include comparison of different upright positions and the supine position. Trials in abstract form were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and assessed trial quality. At least two review authors extracted the data. Data were checked for accuracy. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Results should be interpreted with caution because risk of bias of the included trials was variable. We included eleven new trials for this update; there are now 32 included studies, and one trial is ongoing. Thirty trials involving 9015 women contributed to the analysis. Comparisons include any upright position, birth or squat stool, birth cushion, and birth chair versus supine positions.In all women studied (primigravid and multigravid), when compared with supine positions, the upright position was associated with a reduction in duration of second stage in the upright group (MD -6.16 minutes, 95% CI -9.74 to -2.59 minutes; 19 trials; 5811 women; P = 0.0007; random-effects; I² = 91%; very low-quality evidence); however, this result should be interpreted with caution due to large differences in size and direction of effect in individual studies. Upright positions were also associated with no clear difference in the rates of caesarean section (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.81; 16 trials; 5439 women; low-quality evidence), a reduction in assisted deliveries (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.86; 21 trials; 6481 women; moderate-quality evidence), a reduction in episiotomies (average RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.92; 17 trials; 6148 women; random-effects; I² = 88%), a possible increase in second degree perineal tears (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.44; 18 trials; 6715 women; I² = 43%; low-quality evidence), no clear difference in the number of third or fourth degree perineal tears (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.65; 6 trials; 1840 women; very low-quality evidence), increased estimated blood loss greater than 500 mL (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.98; 15 trials; 5615 women; I² = 33%; moderate-quality evidence), fewer abnormal fetal heart rate patterns (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.93; 2 trials; 617 women), no clear difference in the number of babies admitted to neonatal intensive care (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.21; 4 trials; 2565 infants; low-quality evidence). On sensitivity analysis excluding trials with high risk of bias, these findings were unchanged except that there was no longer a clear difference in duration of second stage of labour (MD -4.34, 95% CI -9.00 to 0.32; 21 trials; 2499 women; I² = 85%).The main reasons for downgrading of GRADE assessment was that several studies had design limitations (inadequate randomisation and allocation concealment) with high heterogeneity and wide CIs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this review suggest several possible benefits for upright posture in women without epidural anaesthesia, such as a very small reduction in the duration of second stage of labour (mainly from the primigravid group), reduction in episiotomy rates and assisted deliveries. However, there is an increased risk blood loss greater than 500 mL and there may be an increased risk of second degree tears, though we cannot be certain of this. In view of the variable risk of bias of the trials reviewed, further trials using well-designed protocols are needed to ascertain the true benefits and risks of various birth positions.

Maternal experience of musculoskeletal pain during pregnancy and birth outcomes: significance of lower back and pelvic pain

AIM

to examine the association between back and pelvic pain during pregnancy and birth outcomes.

BACKGROUND

back and pelvic pain during pregnancy is a common occurrence. It is known to affect maternal functioning and well-being during pregnancy and can persist postnatally and beyond. However, there has been little examination of the impact upon birth outcomes such as birth mode, duration of labour and pain experience.

METHOD

five hundred and eighty mothers with an infant aged zero to six months completed a retrospective questionnaire documenting their pain during pregnancy and birth outcomes (e.g. mode, duration, interventions, perception of pain). Participants also rated overall pain and pain in specific body regions for each of the three trimesters. Estimations of fetal position before birth were given.

FINDINGS

higher pain ratings during the third trimester of pregnancy were associated with increased incidence of caesarean section, assisted delivery and a longer duration of labour. Specifically, lower back and pelvic pain were associated with an increase in complications, potentially due to occurrence of malpositioning of the fetus during pregnancy.

CONCLUSION

mothers who experience high levels of pain during pregnancy may be at increased risk of complications during labour. Explanations for this may be physiological, mechanical or psychological but greater awareness should be given to the potential impact of maternal pain ratings during pregnancy upon birth outcomes.

Position in the second stage of labour for women without epidural anaesthesia

BACKGROUND

For centuries, there has been controversy around whether being upright (sitting, birthing stools, chairs, squatting, kneeling) or lying down have advantages for women delivering their babies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and risks of the use of different positions during the second stage of labour (i.e. from full dilatation of the uterine cervix).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register (28 February 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of any upright or lateral position assumed by pregnant women during the second stage of labour compared with supine or lithotomy positions. Secondary comparisons include comparison of different upright positions and the lateral position.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and assessed trial quality. At least two review authors extracted the data. Data were checked for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

Results should be interpreted with caution as the methodological quality of the 22 included trials (7280 women) was variable.In all women studied (primigravid and multigravid) there was a non-significant reduction in duration of second stage in the upright group (mean difference (MD) -3.71 minutes; 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.78 to 1.37 minutes; 10 trials, 3485 women; random-effects, I(2) = 94%), a significant reduction in assisted deliveries (risk ratio (RR) 0.78; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.90; 19 trials, 6024 women, I(2)= 27%), a reduction in episiotomies (average RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.90, 12 trials, 4541 women; random-effects, I(2) = 7%), an increase in second degree perineal tears (RR 1.35; 95% CI 1.20 to 1.51, 14 trials, 5367 women), increased estimated blood loss greater than 500 ml (RR 1.65; 95% CI 1.32 to 2.60; 13 trials, 5158 women, asymmetric funnel plot indicating publication bias), fewer abnormal fetal heart rate patterns (RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.93; two trials, 617 women). In primigravid women the use of any upright compared with supine positions was associated with: non-significant reduction in duration of second stage of labour (nine trials: mean 3.24 minutes, 95% CI 1.53 to 4.95 minutes) - this reduction was largely due to women allocated to the use of the birth cushion.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this review suggest several possible benefits for upright posture in women without epidural, but with the possibility of increased risk of blood loss greater than 500 mL. Until such time as the benefits and risks of various delivery positions are estimated with greater certainty, when methodologically stringent data from trials are available, women should be allowed to make choices about the birth positions in which they might wish to assume for birth of their babies.

Biomechanics of the female pelvic floor: a prospective trail of the alteration of force-displacement-vectors in parous and nulliparous women

OBJECTIVE

We hypothesize that the holistic and multiplanar depiction of pelvic floor structures by dynamic MRI is of particular value in rendering information about the extent of functional changes that can lead to pelvic floor dysfunction.

METHODS

134 women were prospectively included for assessment of their pelvic floor function.

RESULTS

Study groups differed significantly in the direction of their force-displacement-vectors. A shift from ventral to dorsal is present depending on parity, mode of delivery and age. Maternal age and body height correlated to the force-displacement-vector, whereas maternal weight did not. Pressing direction proved to be dependent on the inclination of the pelvis and the aperture of the levator hiatus while remaining independent from the aperture of the abdominal wall.

CONCLUSION

Biomechanical data interpretation uncovered the pathogenetic relevance of progressive retroflection of the force-displacement-vector. This is responsible for the onset of a vicious cycle of trauma-related force deflection perpetuating pelvic floor traumatization.

Possible feto-maternal clinical risk of the Kristeller’s expression

The aim of this clinical case study is evaluation of possible intrapartal complication of the uncritical Kristeller’s expression. In this retrospective clinical study, data on seven parturients with significant maternal or fetal intrapartum complications during the second labor stage and Kristeller expression, associated with the maneuver, were analyzed. Data was obtained from patient files: history of delivery delivery room protocol and neonatal reports from two tertiary maternal wards. There were five uterine ruptures that were treated by laparotomy and uterine sutures. Atypical rupture location on the uterine fundus occurred in one case, isthmus rupture in three cases, and rupture of the scar left after a previous cesarean section as a potential risk factor for uterine rupture in one case. Complex uterine cervicoisthmic rupture with incomplete colporrhexis occurred during the delivery of a macrosomic child at an outpatient ward. In one case, unilateral fracture of the tenth and eleventh ribs resolved spontaneously without complications. One case of peripartum trauma, possibly associated with extensive expression was observed in one neonates: cutaneous and subcutaneous hematoma on the back with traumatic unilateral adrenal hemorrhage. Both newborns were monitored, successfully treated, and discharged from the hospital free from complications. In conclusion, in the obstetrics as a high risk profession, a very critical approach should be exercised on choosing this maneuver, which should be reserved for the rare and strictly indicated cases, thereby strictly following the professional rules to avoid generally unnecessary and unpleasant litigation and forensic expertise.

Increased blood loss in upright birthing positions originates from perineal damage

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether the risk of severe blood loss is increased in semi-sitting and sitting position, and if so, to which extent blood loss from perineal damage is responsible for this finding.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of data from a large trial.

SETTING

Primary care midwifery practices in the Netherlands.

POPULATION

About 1646 low-risk women who had a spontaneous vaginal delivery.

METHODS

Blood loss was measured using a weighing scale and measuring jug. Logistic regression analysis was used to examine the net effects of birthing position and perineal damage on blood loss greater than 500 ml.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Mean total blood loss and incidence of blood loss greater than 500 ml and 1000 ml.

RESULTS

Mean total blood loss and the incidence of blood loss greater than 500 ml and 1000 ml were increased in semi-sitting and sitting position. In logistic regression analysis, the interaction between birthing position and perineal damage was almost significantly associated with an increased risk of blood loss greater than 500 ml. Semi-sitting and sitting position were only significant risk factors among women with perineal damage (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.00-1.69 and OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.37-3.71, respectively). Among women with intact perineum, no association was found.

CONCLUSIONS

Semi-sitting and sitting birthing positions only lead to increased blood loss among women with perineal damage.

Prolonged second stage of labor and risk of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Safe and effective management of the second stage of labor presents a clinical challenge for laboring women and practitioners of obstetric care. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate evidence for the influence of prolonged second stage of labor on the risk of selected adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes.

METHODS

Articles were searched using PubMed, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL from 1980 until 2005. Studies were included according to 3 criteria: if they reported duration of the second stage of labor, if they reported maternal and/or neonatal outcomes in relation to prolonged second stage, and if they reported original research.

RESULTS

Our systematic review found evidence of a strong association between prolonged second stage and operative delivery. Although significant associations with maternal outcomes such as postpartum hemorrhage, infection, and severe obstetric lacerations were reported, inherent limitations in methodology were evident in the studies. Recurrent limitations included oversimplified categorization of second stage, inconsistency in study population characteristics, and lack of control of confounding factors. No associations between prolonged second stage and adverse neonatal outcomes were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

The primary findings of our review indicated that most of the studies are flawed and do not answer the important questions for maternity caregivers to safely manage prolonged second stage. Meanwhile, approaches for promoting a normal second stage of labor are available to caregivers, such as maternal positioning and pain relief measures and also promoting effective pushing technique.

Supine position compared to other positions during the second stage of labor: a meta-analytic review

The routine use of the supine position during the second stage of labor can be considered to be an intervention in the natural course of labor. This study aimed to establish whether the continuation of this intervention is justified. Nine randomized controlled trials and one cohort study were included. A meta-analysis indicated a higher rate of instrumental deliveries and episiotomies in the supine position. A lower estimated blood loss and lower rate of postpartum hemorrhage were found in the supine position, however it is not clear whether this is a real or only an observed difference. Heterogenous, non-pooled data showed that women experienced more severe pain in the supine position and had a preference for other birthing positions. Many methodological problems were identified in the studies and the appropriateness of a randomized controlled trial to study this subject is called into question. A cohort study is recommended as a more appropriate methodology, supplemented by a qualitative method to study women's experiences. Objective laboratory measurements are advised to examine the difference in blood loss. In conclusion, the results do not justify the continuation of the routine use of the supine position during the second stage of labor.

Position for women during second stage of labour

BACKGROUND

For centuries, there has been controversy around whether being upright (sitting, birthing stools, chairs, squatting) or lying down have advantages for women delivering their babies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and risks of the use of different positions during the second stage of labour (i.e. from full dilatation of the cervix).

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register (16 April 2003).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials that used randomised or quasi-randomised allocation and appropriate follow up and compared various positions assumed by pregnant women during the second stage of labour.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently assessed the trials for inclusion and extracted the data.

MAIN RESULTS

Results should be interpreted with caution as the methodological quality of the 19 included trials (5764 participants) was variable. Use of any upright or lateral position, compared with supine or lithotomy positions, was associated with: reduced duration of second stage of labour (10 trials: mean 4.29 minutes, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.95 to 5.64 minutes) - this was largely due to a considerable reduction in women allocated to the use of the birth cushion; a small reduction in assisted deliveries (18 trials: relative risk (RR) 0.84, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.98); a reduction in episiotomies (12 trials: RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.91); an increase in second degree perineal tears (11 trials: RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.39); increased estimated blood loss greater than 500 ml (11 trials: RR 1.68, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.15); reduced reporting of severe pain during second stage of labour (1 trial: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.90); fewer abnormal fetal heart rate patterns (1 trial: RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.98).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

The tentative findings of this review suggest several possible benefits for upright posture, with the possibility of increased risk of blood loss greater than 500 ml. Women should be encouraged to give birth in the position they find most comfortable. Until such time as the benefits and risks of various delivery positions are estimated with greater certainty, when methodologically stringent trials' data are available, women should be allowed to make informed choices about the birth positions in which they might wish to assume for delivery of their babies.

The "push" for evidence: management of the second stage

Recognition that the available evidence does not support arbitrary time limits for the second stage of labor has led to reconsideration of the influence of maternal bearing down efforts on fetal/newborn status as well as on maternal pelvic structural integrity. The evidence that the duration of 'active' pushing is associated with fetal acidosis and denervation injury to maternal perineal musculature has contributed to the delineation of at least two phases during second stage, an early phase of continued fetal descent, and a phase of "active" pushing. The basis for the recommendation that the early phase of passive descent be prolonged and the phase of active pushing shortened by strategies to achieve effective, but non-detrimental pushing efforts is reviewed. The rational includes an emphasis on the obstetric factors that are optimal for birth and conducive to efficient maternal bearing down. Explicit assessment of these obstetric factors and observation of maternal behavior, particularly evidence of an involuntary urge to push, should be coupled with the use of maternal positions that will promote fetal descent as well as reduce maternal pain. The use of epidural analgesia for pain relief can also be accompanied by these same principles, although further research is needed to verify the strategies of "delayed pushing" and maintenance of pain relief along with a reconceptualization of the second stage of labor.

Maternal posture in labour

The position adopted naturally by women during birth has been described as early as 1882 by Engelmann. He observed that primitive woman, not influenced by Western conventions would try to avoid the dorsal position and was allowed to change position as and when she wished. Different upright positions could be achieved using posts, slung hammock, furniture, holding on to a rope, knotted piece of cloth, or the woman could kneel, crouch, or squat using bricks, stones, a pile of sand, or a birth stool. Today the majority of women in Western societies deliver in a dorsal, semi-recumbent or lithotomy position. It is claimed that the dorsal position enables the midwife/obstetrician to monitor the fetus better and thus to ensure a safe birth. This paper examines the historical background of the different positions used and its evolution throughout the decades. We have reviewed the available evidence about the effectiveness, benefits and possible disadvantages for the use of different positions during the first and second stage of labour.

Woman's position during second stage of labour

BACKGROUND

For centuries, there has been controversy around whether being upright (sitting, birthing stools, chairs, squatting) or lying down have advantages for women delivering their babies.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the benefits and risks of the use of different positions during the second stage of labour (i. e. from full dilatation of the cervix).

SEARCH STRATEGY

Relevant trials are identified from the register of trials maintained by the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group, and from the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials were included which compared various positions assumed by pregnant women during the second stage of labour. Randomised and quasi-randomised trials with appropriate follow-up were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trials were independently assessed for inclusion, and data extracted, by the two authors. Disagreements would have been resolved by consensus with an editor. Meta-analysis of data is performed using the RevMan software.

MAIN RESULTS

Results should be interpreted with caution as the methodological quality of the 18 trials was variable. Use of any upright or lateral position, compared with supine or lithotomy positions, was associated with: 1. Reduced duration of second stage of labour (12 trials - mean 5.4 minutes, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.9 - 6.9 minutes). This was largely due to a considerable reduction in women allocated to use of the birth cushion. 2. A small reduction in assisted deliveries (17 trials - odds ratio (OR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.69 - 0.98). 3. A reduction in episiotomies (11 trials - OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.64 - 0.84). 4. A smaller increase in second degree perineal tears (10 trials - OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.09 - 1.54). 5. Increased estimated risk of blood loss > 500ml (10 trials - OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.34 - 3.32). 6. Reduced reporting of severe pain during second stage of labour (1 trial - OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.41 - 0.83). 7. Fewer abnormal fetal heart rate patterns (1 trial - OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11 - 0.91).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

The tentative findings of this review suggest several possible benefits for upright posture, with the possibility of increased risk of blood loss > 500ml. Women should be encouraged to give birth in the position they find most comfortable. Until such time the benefits and risks of various delivery positions are estimated with greater certainty when methodologically stringent trials data are available, then women should be allowed to make informed choices about the birth positions in which they might wish to assume for delivery of their babies.

Midwifery care research: what questions are being asked? What lessons have been learned?

PURPOSE

To create and critically evaluate a research database about midwifery care that identifies topics studied, research methods, results, funding, publication data, and implications for a future midwifery research agenda.

METHODS

Systematic literature review. Studies included were 1) data-based research; 2) about midwifery care or practice; 3) in the United States; and 4) published between 1984-1998. The CINAHL and MEDLINE electronic databases were searched using a defined strategy, and relevant journals and bibliographies were searched by hand.

RESULTS

This 15-year review identified 140 studies of midwifery care published in 161 papers. A midwife was the lead author on 60%. Sixty percent were published in the Journal of Nurse-Midwifery. Six to 15 studies were published each year, and both the number of publications and funding increased over the time period. The six major areas of focus were: 1) midwifery management, 2) structure of care, 3) midwifery practice, 4) midwife-physician comparisons, 5) place of birth, and 6) care of vulnerable populations.

DISCUSSION

Although retrospective descriptive studies still predominate, more prospective studies, randomized controlled trials, multi-site studies, and quasi-experimental designs are being conducted. Qualitative methods are helping to measure nontraditional outcomes. A research agenda should be established based on discussion and debate within the profession. Midwife investigators need to build research teams and collaborate with other disciplines. Key areas for future research include alternative therapies, breastfeeding, cost-effectiveness, cultural studies, gynecology, health policy, menopause, postpartum care, substance abuse interventions, and the woman's experience of birth and midwifery care.

Maternal fatigue: implications of second stage labor nursing care

The parameters of fatigue have been studied in recent years in relation to women's health and the childbearing period. Less research emphasis has been placed on second stage labor, a period of time that can encompass considerable physiologic and psychologic fatigue. Consideration to minimizing second stage labor fatigue by altering conventional support practices is needed. This includes minimizing long periods of strong pushing or bearing down efforts in conjunction with sustained breath holding, particularly for women receiving epidural anesthesia. The potential sequelae of second stage labor fatigue, recommendations for practice changes, and new research directions are discussed.

Positioning during the second stage of labor: moving back to basics

The advantages of an upright position during labor are presented, with historic, physiologic, and psychosocial aspects discussed. The influences of modern obstetric practices such as electronic fetal monitoring and anesthesia practices are discussed with findings related to the use of upright positions from the Association of Women's Health, Obstetric, and Neonatal Nursing National Research Utilization Project on Second Stage Labor Management integrated. Recommendations for facilitating upright positions on the labor and delivery unit are presented.

Strategies for designing a research utilization project with labor and delivery nurses

The background and development of the second National AWHONN Research Utilization Project on Second Stage Labor Management that was conducted in multiple sites within the United States and Canada are presented. On the basis of the results of the project, recommendations for designing other research utilization projects are discussed.

Nurse advocacy for selective versus routine episiotomy

Although episiotomy is one of the most commonly performed surgeries, little scientific support exists for this procedure. Furthermore, the suggested advantages of routine episiotomy are challenged easily and the surgery is not without risks. Adverse effects arising from episiotomy include an increased incidence of severe lacerations, blood loss, pain, delayed healing, dyspareunia, psychologic trauma, and medical cost. Nurses can assist women in avoiding perineal trauma resulting from unnecessary episiotomy through patient education, patient advocacy, and direct care.

A second look at the second stage of labor

This article focuses on the primary clinical issues during the second stage of labor: diagnosis, duration, maternal bearing-down efforts, and fetal descent, and ways to help women with their expulsive efforts during this time. A pattern of progression for the second stage/expulsive phase of labor is presented, with an emphasis on the importance of delaying direction to or encouragement of the woman to push until the obstetric conditions are optimal for descent and the women has entered the active phase of the second stage. Ongoing assessment of fetal status and descent, the quality of uterine contractions, and maternal condition are emphasized, rather than arbitrary time limits for the second stage. The use of various care practices, including maternal position and alternative bearing-down techniques, which optimize maternal and fetal outcomes, is described. Finally, women's concerns about this major life experience are considered in the context of the care that they receive during the second stage of labor.